白垩纪/古近纪边界的种子性状选择是否基于倍性对植物进行分类?

Q2 Agricultural and Biological Sciences
K. Berry, G. Jaganathan
{"title":"白垩纪/古近纪边界的种子性状选择是否基于倍性对植物进行分类?","authors":"K. Berry, G. Jaganathan","doi":"10.35535/acpa-2022-0012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Paleobotanists debate whether the Cretaceous/Paleogene boundary (KPB) event was selective. As the hypothesis that the KPB event selected for plants with fast-return leaf economic traits (e.g. deciduousness) has lost empirical support in recent investigations, researchers have turned to alternative hypotheses to explain an abrupt decline in primary productivity across the KPB. Two contemporary hypotheses designed to explain selectivity among plants across the KPB are that (1) polyploids exhibited greater survivorship than their diploid progenitors or counterparts (i.e. the KPB-whole genome duplication or WGD hypothesis) and that (2) plants with desiccation-tolerant (DT), i.e. orthodox, seeds exhibited greater survivorship than plants with desiccationsensitive (DS), also known as recalcitrant, seeds. Late embryogenesis abundant (LEA) protein gene families are perceived to confer DT and seed longevity among vascular plants. Non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test for matched pairs and a Mann-Whitney U test reveal that plant lineages perceived to have undergone WGD across the KPB exhibit significantly greater numbers of LEA genes than those that did not. On the basis of these data, this investigation elicits a merger between the KPB-WGD and KPB-seed traits concepts. However, emphasis is shifted from the concept of WGD as an immediate adaptation to climatic stress at the KPB (the KPB-WGD hypothesis) to the concept that WGD was an exaptation, which, by definition, fortuitously enhanced the survival of vascular plants across the KPB but that probably evolved initially in other climatic contexts.","PeriodicalId":39861,"journal":{"name":"Acta Palaeobotanica","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Did selection for seed traits across the Cretaceous/Paleogene boundary sort plants based on ploidy?\",\"authors\":\"K. Berry, G. Jaganathan\",\"doi\":\"10.35535/acpa-2022-0012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Paleobotanists debate whether the Cretaceous/Paleogene boundary (KPB) event was selective. As the hypothesis that the KPB event selected for plants with fast-return leaf economic traits (e.g. deciduousness) has lost empirical support in recent investigations, researchers have turned to alternative hypotheses to explain an abrupt decline in primary productivity across the KPB. Two contemporary hypotheses designed to explain selectivity among plants across the KPB are that (1) polyploids exhibited greater survivorship than their diploid progenitors or counterparts (i.e. the KPB-whole genome duplication or WGD hypothesis) and that (2) plants with desiccation-tolerant (DT), i.e. orthodox, seeds exhibited greater survivorship than plants with desiccationsensitive (DS), also known as recalcitrant, seeds. Late embryogenesis abundant (LEA) protein gene families are perceived to confer DT and seed longevity among vascular plants. Non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test for matched pairs and a Mann-Whitney U test reveal that plant lineages perceived to have undergone WGD across the KPB exhibit significantly greater numbers of LEA genes than those that did not. On the basis of these data, this investigation elicits a merger between the KPB-WGD and KPB-seed traits concepts. However, emphasis is shifted from the concept of WGD as an immediate adaptation to climatic stress at the KPB (the KPB-WGD hypothesis) to the concept that WGD was an exaptation, which, by definition, fortuitously enhanced the survival of vascular plants across the KPB but that probably evolved initially in other climatic contexts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Palaeobotanica\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Palaeobotanica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35535/acpa-2022-0012\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Agricultural and Biological Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Palaeobotanica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35535/acpa-2022-0012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

古植物学家争论白垩纪/古近纪边界(KPB)事件是否具有选择性。由于在最近的研究中,具有快速回归叶片经济性状(如落叶性)的植物选择KPB事件的假设失去了经验支持,研究人员转向其他假设来解释整个KPB的初级生产力突然下降。目前有两种假说旨在解释植物在干旱胁迫下的选择性:(1)多倍体比它们的二倍体祖先或对偶体表现出更高的存活率(即KPB-全基因组重复或WGD假说);(2)具有干旱耐受性(DT)(即正统)种子的植物比具有干旱敏感性(DS)(也称为抗逆性)种子的植物表现出更高的存活率。在维管植物中,胚发生晚期丰富的LEA蛋白基因家族被认为是决定DT和种子寿命的重要因素。配对对的非参数Wilcoxon符号秩检验和Mann-Whitney U检验显示,在KPB中被认为经历过WGD的植物谱系比那些没有经历过WGD的植物谱系表现出显著更多的LEA基因。在这些数据的基础上,本研究引出了KPB-WGD和KPB-seed性状概念的合并。然而,重点从WGD作为KPB对气候胁迫的直接适应的概念(KPB-WGD假说)转移到WGD是一种突变的概念,根据定义,WGD偶然提高了KPB中维管植物的存活率,但最初可能是在其他气候背景下进化的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Did selection for seed traits across the Cretaceous/Paleogene boundary sort plants based on ploidy?
Paleobotanists debate whether the Cretaceous/Paleogene boundary (KPB) event was selective. As the hypothesis that the KPB event selected for plants with fast-return leaf economic traits (e.g. deciduousness) has lost empirical support in recent investigations, researchers have turned to alternative hypotheses to explain an abrupt decline in primary productivity across the KPB. Two contemporary hypotheses designed to explain selectivity among plants across the KPB are that (1) polyploids exhibited greater survivorship than their diploid progenitors or counterparts (i.e. the KPB-whole genome duplication or WGD hypothesis) and that (2) plants with desiccation-tolerant (DT), i.e. orthodox, seeds exhibited greater survivorship than plants with desiccationsensitive (DS), also known as recalcitrant, seeds. Late embryogenesis abundant (LEA) protein gene families are perceived to confer DT and seed longevity among vascular plants. Non-parametric Wilcoxon signed-rank test for matched pairs and a Mann-Whitney U test reveal that plant lineages perceived to have undergone WGD across the KPB exhibit significantly greater numbers of LEA genes than those that did not. On the basis of these data, this investigation elicits a merger between the KPB-WGD and KPB-seed traits concepts. However, emphasis is shifted from the concept of WGD as an immediate adaptation to climatic stress at the KPB (the KPB-WGD hypothesis) to the concept that WGD was an exaptation, which, by definition, fortuitously enhanced the survival of vascular plants across the KPB but that probably evolved initially in other climatic contexts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Palaeobotanica
Acta Palaeobotanica Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Agricultural and Biological Sciences (all)
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Palaeobotanica is an international journal edited in English by the W. Szafer Institute of Botany, Polish Academy of Sciences, Kraków, since 1960, which publishes original palaeobotanical, palynological, palaeoecological and palaeophytogeographical papers, monographs, review and discussion articles and book reviews. It is the only journal in the Central and Eastern Europe publishing papers from all fields of palaeobotany. The journal is published regularly in one volume per year, with two numbers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信